On May 23, Christian Hudon wrote
> Do they compile as modules? Maybe someone could package them up as kernel
> modules in a separate desdis-drivers package, or something like that.
The eepro100.c file had a line in it (grep gcc eepro100.c) which
said how to compile it (given /usr/include/linux for
[Aside: I think I sent a message about ethernet configuration
with a subject line from an X configuration problem. My prior
message on the subject was a bug report about a non-bug. Third
strike and I'm out, but by jove I think I've got it.]
Turns out I've got a buslogic 946C and a 32 bit lance c
On Thu, Sep 23, 1999 at 12:30:55AM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> The problem here is that dpkg doesn't support versioned provides.
> If you install libgnome-perl you have a virtual libgtk-imlib-perl
> on your system. However since virtual packages don't have versions
> dpkg cannot satisfy the ve
On Thu, Sep 23, 1999 at 11:06:48AM +0900, Taketoshi Sano wrote:
> and (here is my proposal)
>
> d) sash will create a locked sashroot account with useradd, and
>display the message to use sashpasswd above as soon as possible.
That's an interesting idea. I'll think about it.
> By th
On Thu, Sep 23, 1999 at 07:32:50AM -0500, Ashley Clark wrote:
> Couldn't sash include a PAM module that would change the password to
> match root's password whenever it was changed? Or am I oversimplifying
> things?
I don't have enough confidence in Debian's pam, yet, to insist that
everyone that
On Thu, Sep 23, 1999 at 02:38:46PM -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
> Just out of curiosity, does sash support the standard -c command line
> option yet? If not, I wouldn't really consider pushing it as a root
> shell since it will break a lot of scripts (from cron and elsewhere).
$ sash -c date
Thu Sep
On Fri, Sep 24, 1999 at 11:18:52AM +0100, Gordon Russell wrote:
> I am currently playing around with vmware, running win98. However, the
> performance stinks (I am using a beta release though). The strange thing
> is though that if I do a
> find / -print > /dev/null
> in another window, the perform
On Fri, Sep 24, 1999 at 11:34:28PM -0500, The Doctor What wrote:
> I do not like the idea of a daemon starting up with a default
> configuration that I have not double checked upon installation. I
> consider automatically starting with no choice a misfeature.
I think I agree.
I got a rude start
On Sat, Sep 25, 1999 at 01:27:51PM +0200, Marek Habersack wrote:
> The proposal, as I can see it, is to write a PAM module that could
> be added to /etc/pam.d/passwd to ask whether the just-changed root
> password should be cloned into the sashroot account. And that's a
> really elegant and clean s
On Sat, Sep 25, 1999 at 10:11:17AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> > Ii I install a daemon, I want to use it.
Do you want it for personal use, or do you want it available as a
public service?
--
Raul
Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Perhaps there are people who want a "service enabled by default" policy,
> > and perhaps we should accomodate them. However, I'm not one of them
> > and I don't want any services turned on on some of my machi
On Mon, Sep 27, 1999 at 11:46:39AM +0200, Siggy Brentrup wrote:
> Is it really censoring to keep all non-technical packages out of main?
> I don't say don't package it nor don't make it available.
Maybe it's time to fork off an independent documentation project?
We'd need to provide them a stable
On Mon, Sep 27, 1999 at 11:22:32AM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
> I think the key difference is that if some one screws with the BTS or
> the Debian web site, it's not going to *me* any harm during the time
> it takes to discover and undo the damage. If someone installs a bad or
> malicious libc6
On Tue, Sep 28, 1999 at 12:05:37AM -0400, Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:
> Why even involve debhelper? At least in the case of the Project Gutenberg
> files some of which I have, they are just long ascii files so the rules
> file could just stick them into (for example) /usr/share/doc/etexts call
> doc-ba
On Mon, Sep 27, 1999 at 06:56:00PM +0100, Marco Budde wrote:
> RR> I just installed it, but as far as I can see this doesn't integrate
> RR> FHS and FSSTND
>
> Right, because this is not possible.
Counter-example:
(
dump() {
lynx -dump -source -width=1000 $1 |
On Tue, Sep 28, 1999 at 06:08:48PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
> > Correction: mtools in slink does *not* depend on anything but libc6, so
> > there is still time to do it, cleanly.
> >
> > Maintainer, please do it.
On Tue, Sep 28, 1999 at 12:28:08PM -0500, David Starner wrote:
...
> First, I belie
On Tue, Sep 28, 1999 at 04:23:22PM -0400, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
> Then we'll have to agree where we register docs. I have the
> following directories on a fresh potato system (with few packages):
>
> /usr/share/doc/HTML/
> /usr/doc/HTML/
>
> And they are _not_ symlinks. They get created by d
On Wed, Sep 29, 1999 at 01:18:43AM +0200, David Weinehall wrote:
> I suggest one of the guys on Debian-legal makes contact with UW and asks
> for their consent to distribute a Pine vx.yDebian binary. I do believe
> them to be pretty reasonable.
Or you could.
--
Raul
P.S. you made this suggestio
[about a flat-file installation tool].
On Tue, Sep 28, 1999 at 07:58:02PM +0200, Remco Blaakmeer wrote:
> If you make such a tool and people start to use it on a large scale, you'd
> better be sure you get the package dependencies right.
The context was data files which have no particular adminis
On Wed, Sep 29, 1999 at 09:57:53PM +1000, Drake Diedrich wrote:
>One way to minimize the harm of unintentionally installed or
> misconfigured daemons would be to add a default ipchain/ipfwadm policy
> rejecting all TCP SYN (incoming initialization) and non-DNS UDP packets
> except those from lo
On Tue, Sep 28, 1999 at 08:25:00PM +0100, Marco Budde wrote:
> ROTFL, why should I change dhelp to support a broken file format?
...
> dhelp supports all formats.
...
These statements contradict each other.
--
Raul
On Wed, Sep 29, 1999 at 06:01:00PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
> But who said mtools need to depend on floppyd package?
$ dpkg -L mtools | grep floppyd
/usr/bin/floppyd
/usr/bin/floppyd_installtest
/usr/share/man/man1/floppyd.1.gz
--
Raul
On Wed, Sep 29, 1999 at 10:08:39PM +0300, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
> Pseudonymes have been used throughout the history, so that's not
> a problem. For our protection, however, I'd recommend that you and
> tftp work out a agreement so that at least one Debian developer (you,
> for example) alw
On Thu, Sep 30, 1999 at 02:16:31PM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
> to paraphrase: i am against messing with the current default. i am not
> against (indeed, i am in favour of) increasing choice.
There is currently no default -- it varies on a per-package basis.
> ... there are already way too man
On Thu, Sep 30, 1999 at 08:46:38AM +0300, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 29, 1999 at 10:56:53PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> > PGP is legally classified in the same category as atomic weapons.
>
> No, it's not. Atomic weapons are controlled by international trea
> > There is currently no default -- it varies on a per-package basis.
On Thu, Sep 30, 1999 at 09:21:29AM -0400, Clint Adams wrote:
> I note that
>
> ### to run vtund as a server on port 5000, uncomment the following line:
> #--server-- 5000
>
> isn't uncommented by default.
Sure, but in the co
On Thu, Sep 30, 1999 at 07:23:53PM +0300, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 30, 1999 at 08:50:40AM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> > Treaties are different from laws.
>
> On the contrary, ratified treaties are a binding part of the Finnish
> legislation, as if they were or
On Thu, Sep 30, 1999 at 09:05:43PM +0200, Marcel Harkema wrote:
> I am going to rename the poc (portable object compiler) package to objc if
> no-one objects. The upstream author requested this. Also, libgc4 (boehm
> gc) support is dropped. A new additional package will be introduced with
On Fri, Oct 01, 1999 at 10:53:44AM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
> i'm talking about the current practice of postinst scripts in various
> packages enabling the services that they provide (if any). i am not
> talking at all about which packages are base or required or extra or
> whatever - i'm talkin
On Fri, Oct 01, 1999 at 05:01:05AM +0100, Chris Rutter wrote:
> Yes, probably; but no. RMS is referring to the fact that many authors
> of many pieces of xemacs haven't assigned copyright to the FSF,
> meaning that copyright remains with them, or possibly even their
> employer, depending on sticky
On Thu, Sep 30, 1999 at 07:31:00PM +0100, Marco Budde wrote:
> Ok, you#re right. But the classic http daemons (cern for example) used/use
> chroot() for security reasons. You#re right, the current apache package
> supports symlinks, but will all users use apache? Will all users use
> FollowSy
On Fri, Oct 01, 1999 at 03:00:51PM +0200, Torsten Landschoff wrote:
> If somebody could come up with a better method of handling this it would be
> most welcome.
I'd suggest releasing a bash (which doesn't use #!/bin/sh scripts for
install/remove) that, in postinst, divert's bash's /bin/sh. Leave
On Fri, Oct 01, 1999 at 07:36:28PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> Consider if we have bugs 0->199 and you take the first digit. You end up
> with 10 bugs in each bucket except bucket '1' which has 110. Put that on a
> broader scale and account for expired bugs and you see the trouble.
Why not bas
On Fri, Oct 01, 1999 at 08:36:01AM -0400, Ivan E. Moore II wrote:
> > > yea...I just did an update today and something decided to remove
> > > /bin/sh during the upgrade...and didn't put it back before it
> > > was needed... so if something hoses for you just recreate it by
> > > linking it to like
On Sun, Oct 03, 1999 at 08:56:23AM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> The idea is that when you upgrade the package like telnetd, there
> may be new shlib dependencies, etc. which means that you should stop
> spawning new daemons until it is configured. Of course, this may
> not happen for every release, b
On Sun, Oct 03, 1999 at 02:59:38AM -0400, Rick wrote:
> I'm uncertain whether this is a good idea or not. I have helped many
> people install redhat linux and, frankly, the daemon enable screen
> confuses them. They don't know what all these things are or which ones
> they may need. If this gets
On Sun, Oct 03, 1999 at 10:07:03AM -0400, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 03, 1999 at 09:44:25AM -0400, Raul Miller was heard to say:
> > A wonderfuly horrible hack has occurred to me, by the way: A cron job
> > which runs every minute: /bin/sh -c exit || /sbin/rebuild-bi
On Sat, Oct 02, 1999 at 08:06:10PM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
> i show no regard for those who demonstrate they are fools. i show
> contempt for those who demonstrate that they are annoying fools. guess
> which category you fall into.
Ok, try this on for size:
How many network services do you ge
On Sat, Oct 02, 1999 at 03:53:43PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> In any case, I fail to see how pressing `_' in dselect before any
> unnecessary daemons are installed could possibly be less secure than
> saying "No, I don't want services activated by default" and then
> installing them anyway.
How
On Sun, Oct 03, 1999 at 09:44:25AM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 02, 1999 at 12:30:04PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > > Just having /bin/sh included in the .deb is Good Enough -- diversions
> > > work as designed.
> > Good Enough is not good enough (TM
On Sun, Oct 03, 1999 at 10:06:02AM -0400, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> [ as I understand it, a security 'breach' could only occur with this
> system if a user had execute permissions but *not* read permissions
> on a file that wasn't of a normal executable format; in other words:
> rwx--x--x /usr/bin/ha
On Sun, Oct 03, 1999 at 09:57:12AM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> > As far as I know, leaving inetd accepting connections would,
> > worst case, fail -- which is no different from having the service
> > disabled. In other words, I don't see that disabling the daemon
> >
On Mon, Oct 04, 1999 at 02:10:45AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> (What is the problem with --rename, btw? I'm curious, and dpkg-divert is
> horribly underdocumented)
>From dpkg-divert --help:
--rename causes dpkg-divert to actually move the file aside (or back).
There's no reason to remove the /
On Mon, Oct 04, 1999 at 08:13:02AM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
> it may be an important tool, but that doesn't give you or anyone else
> the right to pester people in their own homes. it really does no good
> to apologise or even to promise not to call back - by that time, the
> damage has been don
> > to minimise downtime, the proper way to do it IMHO is to have
> > > certain packages flagged as daemons, and they should be upgraded
> > > (by whatever program that is in charge) one by one.
On Sun, Oct 03, 1999 at 07:06:10PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> > Under
On Mon, Oct 04, 1999 at 01:58:07PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> One benefit always moving it has, is that it tests all code paths on upgrade
> (including the "add a /bin/sh symlink") which makes it more likely to catch
> any bugs while we're still working on potato.
>
> I don't see how this makes
On Sun, Oct 03, 1999 at 09:31:42PM -0700, Yves Arrouye wrote:
> > b) give the Project Leader the ability to stop stupid things like the
> >/usr/doc -> /usr/share/doc debate, and just pick an option.
>
> That's been the case at some point. Isn't it true anymore?
The DPL has this ability. In t
On Tue, Oct 05, 1999 at 10:58:06AM +0300, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
> Or simpler:
>
> grep-status -P netscape | grep-dctrl -FStatus -sPackage -n \
> 'install ok installed' | xargs dpkg --purge
Or simpler, and closer to the original intent:
dpkg --get-selections | grep 'netscape' |
On Tue, Oct 05, 1999 at 11:00:46AM +0100, Edward Betts wrote:
> So how many other developers are not using unstable?
Perhaps this should be taken up on another list, if you expect input
from more than a few people.
For what it's worth, I'm using a slink system with potato in my
apt/sources.list,
On Tue, Oct 05, 1999 at 11:00:46AM +0100, Edward Betts wrote:
> > > So how many other developers are not using unstable?
Raul Miller wrote:
> > Perhaps this should be taken up on another list, if you expect input
> > from more than a few people.
On Tue, Oct 05, 1999 at 0
On Tue, Oct 05, 1999 at 10:27:00PM -0700, Joey Hess wrote:
> What am I supposed to do? I could make debconf depend on perl-5.005, but it
> really works with any version of perl 5. Also, if only perl-5.004-base,
> perl-5.005, and perl-5.005-base were installed, and the alternatives pointed
> /usr/bi
On Fri, Mar 10, 2000 at 09:03:25PM +0100, Richard P. Groenewegen wrote:
> [2] Logging in is still impossible: my password is accepted but
> apparently I cannot connect to the X-server (here is my
> .xsession-errors:)
>
> Xlib: connection to ":0.0" refused by server
> Xlib: Clie
On Sat, Mar 11, 2000 at 08:30:08PM -0400, Nicolás Lichtmaier wrote:
> I think we have a problem here. The DFSG clearly does not apply to
> documentation, just like the GPL. As the FSF created a new license, we need
> to create guidelines to what we consider a "free documentation", as in free
> spe
On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 09:23:11AM +0300, Eray Ozkural wrote:
> > For simplicity's sake, I think it's just good enough to include /sbin,
> > /usr/sbin and /usr/local/sbin in user's default path.
>
On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 02:42:37AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> I think if someone has to do such
On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 02:34:26PM +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> We can put everything in /bin and make /sbin a link to /bin.
> This way the utilities the FHS liste can be found in /sbin, but there
> physical place is elsewhere. This does not violate the standard.
This has nasty implications wi
On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 12:40:42PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> In other words, I think the choice of directory should be controlled by
> factors intrinsic, not extrinsic, to the program in question.
I think this is a reasonable viewpoint.
--
Raul
> I've an outstanding, unanswered question which I've sent to UW in a
> related context (IMAPD): what specific clause of the copyright is being
> violated, when modified versions are distributed.
On Thu, Aug 31, 2000 at 02:46:40PM -0600, Richard Stallman wrote:
> Their position was tha
On Fri, Sep 01, 2000 at 03:39:05PM +0200, Sven Guckes wrote:
> I don't see why Debian (or GNU, or "Linux") bothers with the IMAPD of
> UofW so much at all. Aren't there quite some replacements by now?
[1] The copyright appears to meet our standards (DFSG).
[2] The only alternative imap daemon doe
On Fri, Sep 01, 2000 at 01:26:53PM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
> That to me says Debian has permission to re-distribute our modified
> version, but that people who recieve it from us do not, unless they
> too ask permission ("We do expect and appreciate..."). Non-free. If
> she had written just "
> > Their position was that the words "permission to copy, distribute and
> > modify" do not grant permission to distribute a modified version. In
> > other words, they say you can distribute the software, and you can
> > modify the software, but you can't modify it and then distri
> > There's no legal difference between "Debian" and "people who recieve
> > it from us". [Legally, there's no such entity as "Debian".]
> >
> > Nor is there a difference from the viewpoint of our social contract.
On Tue, Sep 05, 2000 at 10:35:49AM -0400, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
> Then why do we
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 06:09:31PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
> nobody's telling anyone to get any particular ISP or that they have to
> pay for a premium quality service.
True.
> it's simple - if you want a service that's worth having, you pay
> whatever it costs. if you don't want that, then p
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 09:06:55PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
> i think you misread what i said. i said that missing or incorrect
> reverse DNS is *NOT* a good reason for bouncing mail.
I guess I did.
Thanks,
--
Raul
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscri
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 10:47:01AM -0700, Joey Hess wrote:
> I don't see us making this kind of check for code written in perl, or
> code wirtten in C, or any other language.
Perl is available under two licenses: GPL + Artistic. Not much room
for a reasonable person to introduce conflict there.
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 05:52:04PM -0500, Joseph Carter wrote:
> Fortunately, my part of it is done - KDE is being uploaded to Debian
> now to join Qt in main. Unfortunately, not by any action of KDE. Troll
> Tech made the decision. KDE and Debian both benefit. I can speak
> for a sizable portion o
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 07:35:44AM -0400, Brian Almeida wrote:
> 'explorer' also depends on it (using the old qt1g package name)
Explorer also has nine bugs, some important, six over two years old.
Note especially:
#29053: package explorer depends on obsolete library libstdc++2.8 (1y, 308d)
#53
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Stallman) writes:
> > Meanwhile, you don't seem to be concerned about the mob of people
> > who are attacking me.
On Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 06:06:53PM +0200, Paul Seelig wrote:
> I may now be even more concerned that you seem to consider the authors
> of free KDE software
On Mon, 11 Sep 2000, erik wrote:
[lots of stuff deleted -- basically a bitch about new maintainer]
On Wed, Sep 13, 2000 at 07:57:41AM -0400, Christopher C. Chimelis wrote:
> Good point :-)
Not really:
[1] This point (if it really erik's point -- hard to tell) is
not well expressed by erik's subj
On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 10:41:46AM +0100, Mathieu Roy wrote:
> You are currently saying that the GNU in GNU/Linux is justified by the
> glibc and not by any other GNU software, because these GNU software
> are common on other unixes.
Maybe what he was saying, but that's obviously not the real issu
On Tue, May 20, 2003 at 12:19:33PM -0700, John H. Robinson, IV wrote:
>The amendment uses the concept of a Quorum requirement to inhibit
>"stealth decisions" by only a handful of developers. While this is a
>good thing, the per-option quorum from the amendment has a tendency to
>fur
On Tue, May 20, 2003 at 02:39:08PM -0700, John H. Robinson, IV wrote:
> example: quorum of 20, two ballots on the measure, plus the default
> option. two major schools of thought: those that support option A, and
> those that support option B.
If the quorum of 20 is significant, neither school of
> On Tue, May 20, 2003 at 05:58:10PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > At this point; under my version; I can express my opinions
> > with no fear of harming my candidate. Under your amendment; if I do
> > not vote; the vote is nullified. However, if I vote against the
> > option -- the opt
On Wed, May 21, 2003 at 09:57:13PM +1200, Nick Phillips wrote:
> I don't believe that it's acceptable for an otherwise beaten option
> to win due the the otherwise winning option being discarded due
> to a quorum requirement, as John suggests might happen.
Under the proposed system, we would do ex
> On Tue, May 20, 2003 at 04:57:18PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> > "Hard to understand"? We'd require a certain level of voter approval
> > before we'll consider an option -- options which don't achieve that
> > can't win. How is this "
Andreas Degert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No, i meant you can't prevent the parser to error out on some edited
> config files, not that it will happen with every edited config file.
config files which are broken should be treated as error conditions.
For example, if you put this email message i
Andreas Degert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> if you take a static list of questions for a package, you have to
> answer _all_ questions, even if in the postinst many questions are
> conditionally asked depending on the answers to other questions or the
> state of the system
No. You have to allow s
Andreas Degert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> please don't answer too quickly; if you think about it a second
> (in the context of the thread) you will realize that I wrote about
> syntactically and semantically correct config files that are too
> complex for the parser.
That shouldn't matter for co
Andreas Degert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That is not the point; of course just the parsing, the syntactical
> portion, is rather easy. Else, how should a program like samba parse
> it's config files? Even if it's a complex embedded language, by
> definition its syntax can be parsed, and if it's
Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> dpkg should start one thread to extract a package, when a package is
> done a second threat is signaled and the next is extracted.
>
> The second thread configures the package. If any question is to be
> asked, the controll is given to a third threat and the
Richard Braakman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://master.debian.org/~dark/lintian/reports/depcheck.html#i386 :-)
Looks like libstdc++2.8 and libgdbmg1 should be required, and that
dpkg-dev, dpkg-perl, and libnet-perl should be standard.
--
Raul
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
James Troup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No; perl shouldn't depend on libgdbmg1. libgdbmg1 is obsolete and
> deprecated. I asked the perl maintainer if he could fix this back in
> March or so, apparently it hasn't happened.
This close to hamm's release, we should probably rely on non-maintainer
I would like to recommend that linux 2.0.34 be made available as a
part of hamm. This is because 2.0.34 is a bugfix-only upgrade to
2.0.33.
However, I don't think we have enough experience with 2.0.34 to
eliminate 2.0.33 from the distribution. So both should be available.
--
Raul
--
To UNSU
Luis Francisco Gonzalez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Let's be clear about what this means. We need to compile the kernel
> and all packages that depend on it, pcmcia-modules, boot-floppies,
> etc. (We could, I guess live with the boot-floppies being 2.0.33 but
> given that there is a mismatch betwe
Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How is it possible to check for block sizes with lintian? And what do you
> expect a maintainer to do if they use a different block size and lintian
> dislikes that? Reformat?
To deal with block sizes we'll need to abandon (or upgrade) du.
To find out what b
Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> To deal with block sizes we'll need to abandon (or upgrade) du.
Argh.. please ignore this sentence, it makes no sense.
--
Raul
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jason Gunthorpe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This is getting out of hand, do we really need to consider slack space
> when calculating if the user has enough room to install!?
No, what we mostly need is an estimate.
--
Raul
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsub
Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 3) We have the magical mystical respawning-xdm-on-broken-configuration
> problem.
What about the idea of running the x server directly from init,
and using xdmcp? Is that bogus?
--
Raul
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject
Jules Bean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is du -k not the answer?
du -S, but you need to know how many files are in each directory
to estimate block-size overhead -- assume that each file requires
two thirds of a block of unused space and you won't be too far off.
--
Raul
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, ema
Chris Lawrence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [RMS article omitted because it may only be distributed "verbatim"; my
> quoting would violate his copyright]
No, fair use allows quotes.
--
Raul
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL P
Jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Speaking as a debian advocate, it would be highly embarrassing to try
> to explain something like "Oh yeah, the new kernel is there, but you
> can't use it yet since ..." where ... stems from the person's need for
> some dependant package. Example: say he needs pcmc
James Troup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't know perl, and am only going on what Ray has been telling me.
> It was my understanding that perl could be made to dynamically load
> it's gdbm part on request and that way perl need only recommend or
> (better) suggest gdbm. Is this not the case?
Karl M. Hegbloom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There are man pages in the base set that I cannot read. Man isn't there.
You should be able to read them for content (even if it's not very
pretty) using ae.
--
Raul
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". T
Bdale Garbee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Am working on the release-critical bugs in bind. It appears that
> lintian flags the 'mx' and 'ns' commands as possible namespace
> pollution. These, along with '', 'soa', and 'zone' are symlinks
> to 'host' that do quickie lookups for those types of re
Chris Lawrence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dunno. But a lot of people have a copyright restriction in the document to
> make sure that the actual integrity of the standard remains intact (see, for
> example, the W3C's standards for HTTP and HTML).
This need is met by a "label is sacred" sort of
Gregory S. Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Would this be the default TERM value for xterm? I assume you realize
> that this means any user telnetting from a debian machine to any other
> distribution or OS will not get a useful terminal.
If you read the howto, you'd see that there was a handlin
Luis Francisco Gonzalez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Precisely, in bo the boot-floppies had to disable pcmcia because it was
> broken. I guess you never had to install using a pcmcia network card.
> If we make changes to the kernels, let's make sure there is no broken
> dependent package.
I don't
Richard Braakman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't see any way we could have preserved compatibility more than
> we did, with the hamm release. The entire altdev scheme was devised
> for it. What more could have been done?
That was solved a long time ago, and isn't the reason hamm was
delayed
Jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Are you unhappy with the result (hamm)? I'm not...
I'm not unhappy with hamm, but I am unhappy that we didn't have any
releases between bo and hamm.
Mind you, I've come up with workarounds, but I also had some service
outages that could have been avoided if I cou
G John Lapeyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My last message couldn't have been more wrong ! Maybe there is a
> difference between the perl interface to gdbm and some core perl function
> that relies on it ?
I guess I'm forced to agree:
# cd /usr/lib
# ls *gdbm*
libgdbm.a libgdbm.so.1
Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This again means that we need to encourage more maintainers to work on
> multi-package-solution and to skip the 300-mini-cathedral-situation.
> Only few people are working on package that are not maintained by
> them, this needs to be re-considered.
I'm
301 - 400 of 513 matches
Mail list logo
